'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

gigag04
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5474
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 7:47 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#16

Post by gigag04 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:37 pm

You can still get popped under DOC - FIGHTING but that was always more of a problem solver than something you went looking for
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. - Thomas Edison


KD5NRH
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3119
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:25 am
Location: Stephenville TX

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#17

Post by KD5NRH » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:43 pm

OK, so what governs two people putting on boxing gloves and pads, and having a match out in the back yard? No advertising or admission fees; just two people consensually doing things to each other calculated to cause bodily injury? (By the definition of bodily injury presented in the penal code, ("physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition") the only non-assaultive way you could ever win a boxing match is by standing around until your opponent gets bored and leaves.)

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#18

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:06 pm

croc870 wrote:Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution under Section 22.01 (Assault), 22.02 (Aggravated Assault), or 22.05 (Deadly Conduct) if:
(1) the conduct did not threaten or inflict serious bodily injury; or
(2) the victim knew the conduct was a risk of:
(A) his occupation;
(B) recognized medical treatment; or
(C) a scientific experiment conducted by recognized methods.
(b) The defense to prosecution provided by Subsection (a) is not available to a defendant who commits an offense described by Subsection (a) as a condition of the defendant's or the victim's initiation or continued membership in a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
Not only is this just defense to prosecution, but it is not entirely relevant. Only under Assault, Aggravated Assault, or Deadly Conduct does this consider to be a defense to prosecution. TO my understanding, say you were a boxer, or teaching karate, etc, it would be relevant to protect you from being charged with assault. If this were a fight between family member, it would still fall under the Class A Misdemeanor I listed above. Note that family violence is highly condemned in the state of Texas.

For simple assault, it can be helpful, so long as there was no serious bodily injury, but you'll still take the ride, which is what the OP was asking about IMO.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#19

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:09 pm

KD5NRH wrote:OK, so what governs two people putting on boxing gloves and pads, and having a match out in the back yard? No advertising or admission fees; just two people consensually doing things to each other calculated to cause bodily injury? (By the definition of bodily injury presented in the penal code, ("physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition") the only non-assaultive way you could ever win a boxing match is by standing around until your opponent gets bored and leaves.)
Agreed, there is no winning in this situation, as inflicting any bodily injury upon another person can be considered a crime in the state of Texas. In the end, you can beat the rap, but not the ride.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.


croc870
Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:28 pm

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#20

Post by croc870 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:02 pm

Why do you think that this defense would not apply to a family violence incident? Family violence is an enhancement, not a separate offence for assault. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something you're referring to?

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

<EDIT>

#21

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Sat Nov 22, 2014 8:13 am

<EDIT> (DOUBLE POST)
Last edited by Charlies.Contingency on Wed Nov 26, 2014 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#22

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Sat Nov 22, 2014 8:15 am

croc870 wrote:Why do you think that this defense would not apply to a family violence incident? Family violence is an enhancement, not a separate offense for assault. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something you're referring to?
It is an enhancement, so therefore it cannot be considered simple assault. The family part makes all the difference. If you were in a boxing ring, it is a lot different then bloodying your brothers face over a football game. An enhancement should be treated like any other. If there were a deadly weapon involved, though it's still a form of assault, just enhanced, doesn't mean it can be ignore because it was mutual. Assault can be as simple as a shove, a push... I am I the only one that see's it this way?
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.


talltex
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:40 pm
Location: Waco area

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#23

Post by talltex » Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:41 am

KD5NRH wrote:OK, so what governs two people putting on boxing gloves and pads, and having a match out in the back yard? No advertising or admission fees; just two people consensually doing things to each other calculated to cause bodily injury? (By the definition of bodily injury presented in the penal code, ("physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition") the only non-assaultive way you could ever win a boxing match is by standing around until your opponent gets bored and leaves.)
Theoretically, nothing...but common sense will generally prevail. First off, unless someone calls the police to complain, there is no potential offense to be investigated...it never happened. Secondly...assuming some uninvolved third party called it in, and the police responded and found a couple of buddies just having a friendly match, or actually doing some serious sparring in or out of a gym setting, I doubt that any type of charges would be filed. Otherwise, the same charges would apply to any legitimate boxing gym, martial arts dojo, and so forth. COULD an officer make them "take the ride"? Sure, but again, I'd hope that common sense and some discretion would be used.
"I looked out under the sun and saw that the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong" Ecclesiastes 9:11

"The race may not always go to the swift or the battle to the strong, but that's the way the smart money bets" Damon Runyon


JP171
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:47 am
Location: San Leon Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#24

Post by JP171 » Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:42 am

Charles, you cannot "enhance" what didn't occur period full stop

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#25

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:56 am

JP171 wrote:Charles, you cannot "enhance" what didn't occur period full stop
What do you mean what didn't occur? Or are you referencing to me? (Charlie)
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.


KD5NRH
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3119
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:25 am
Location: Stephenville TX

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#26

Post by KD5NRH » Wed Nov 26, 2014 10:00 am

Charlies.Contingency wrote:
croc870 wrote:Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution under Section 22.01 (Assault), 22.02 (Aggravated Assault), or 22.05 (Deadly Conduct) if:
(1) the conduct did not threaten or inflict serious bodily injury; or
(2) the victim knew the conduct was a risk of:
(A) his occupation;
(B) recognized medical treatment; or
(C) a scientific experiment conducted by recognized methods.
(b) The defense to prosecution provided by Subsection (a) is not available to a defendant who commits an offense described by Subsection (a) as a condition of the defendant's or the victim's initiation or continued membership in a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
Not only is this just defense to prosecution, but it is not entirely relevant. Only under Assault, Aggravated Assault, or Deadly Conduct does this consider to be a defense to prosecution. TO my understanding, say you were a boxer, or teaching karate, etc, it would be relevant to protect you from being charged with assault. If this were a fight between family member, it would still fall under the Class A Misdemeanor I listed above. Note that family violence is highly condemned in the state of Texas.

For simple assault, it can be helpful, so long as there was no serious bodily injury, but you'll still take the ride, which is what the OP was asking about IMO.
The problem here is that boxing or any martial art can easily cause serious bodily injury, (invalidating the defense by point (1)) even if that is not the intent, and any participant should be well aware of that, therefore any such injury would be caused knowingly.

User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#27

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Wed Nov 26, 2014 11:42 am

KD5NRH wrote:
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
croc870 wrote:Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution under Section 22.01 (Assault), 22.02 (Aggravated Assault), or 22.05 (Deadly Conduct) if:
(1) the conduct did not threaten or inflict serious bodily injury; or
(2) the victim knew the conduct was a risk of:
(A) his occupation;
(B) recognized medical treatment; or
(C) a scientific experiment conducted by recognized methods.
(b) The defense to prosecution provided by Subsection (a) is not available to a defendant who commits an offense described by Subsection (a) as a condition of the defendant's or the victim's initiation or continued membership in a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
Not only is this just defense to prosecution, but it is not entirely relevant. Only under Assault, Aggravated Assault, or Deadly Conduct does this consider to be a defense to prosecution. TO my understanding, say you were a boxer, or teaching karate, etc, it would be relevant to protect you from being charged with assault. If this were a fight between family member, it would still fall under the Class A Misdemeanor I listed above. Note that family violence is highly condemned in the state of Texas.

For simple assault, it can be helpful, so long as there was no serious bodily injury, but you'll still take the ride, which is what the OP was asking about IMO.
The problem here is that boxing or any martial art can easily cause serious bodily injury, (invalidating the defense by point (1)) even if that is not the intent, and any participant should be well aware of that, therefore any such injury would be caused knowingly.
True, and as I look back through this thread, it appears that it may have been aimed more towards, finding a defense to fighting with your brother... It might just be me, but that's the way it looks now. Don't want to go to jail, don't get into a physical altercation, simple as that. If you both say, (Colorful word inserted here) it, lets duke it out in the front yard, jail time may be the consequence.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.


KD5NRH
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3119
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:25 am
Location: Stephenville TX

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#28

Post by KD5NRH » Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:36 pm

Charlies.Contingency wrote:True, and as I look back through this thread, it appears that it may have been aimed more towards, finding a defense to fighting with your brother... It might just be me, but that's the way it looks now. Don't want to go to jail, don't get into a physical altercation, simple as that. If you both say, (Colorful word inserted here) it, lets duke it out in the front yard, jail time may be the consequence.
Not really; with a former roommate, when one of us had a bad day, we would go out back and spar for a bit to blow off steam. Depending on how bad of a day, sometimes we were pushing the limits of the pads, but nothing that would be out of place in any training gym.


R DAVIS
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 10:18 am

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#29

Post by R DAVIS » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:03 pm


User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts

#30

Post by Charlies.Contingency » Thu Nov 27, 2014 7:05 am

KD5NRH wrote:
Charlies.Contingency wrote:True, and as I look back through this thread, it appears that it may have been aimed more towards, finding a defense to fighting with your brother... It might just be me, but that's the way it looks now. Don't want to go to jail, don't get into a physical altercation, simple as that. If you both say, (Colorful word inserted here) it, lets duke it out in the front yard, jail time may be the consequence.
Not really; with a former roommate, when one of us had a bad day, we would go out back and spar for a bit to blow off steam. Depending on how bad of a day, sometimes we were pushing the limits of the pads, but nothing that would be out of place in any training gym.
That wasn't really in reference to suiting up and sparing, this is more in reference to two brothers literally getting in a "fist fight," I'm sure somebody else know what I'm talking about. When people get into a heated argument, they don't generally say, "Hey, lets go suit up so we don't accidentally hurt each other." It's usually more like, "Hey, Outside now, I'm going to kick your "BLANK!" There's a big difference to me, between two people suiting up to spar, and two people throwing bare punches, and wrestling on the front lawn. All IMO of course.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”